Distinctive distribution of phospho-alpha-synuclein in dermal nerves in multiple system atrophy.

BACKGROUND: MSA is characterized by deposition of alpha-synuclein (α-Syn) in oligodendrocytes and central nervous system (CNS) neurons. After recently detecting phospho-α-Syn (p-α-Syn) in dermal nerve fibers of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), we assessed skin biopsies from patients with MSA to evaluate its potential role as a biomarker. METHODS: Skin biopsies of patients with MSA (n = 12), idiopathic PD (n = 30), tauopathies (n = 15), and normal controls (n = 39) were analyzed. P-α-Syn within dermal nerves was detected by immunofluorescence staining. RESULTS: p-α-Syn was found in 67% of patients with MSA and Parkinson's disease, but not in patients with tauopathy or controls when analyzing 15 consecutive sections. Sensitivity could be increased to 75% and 73%, respectively, by analyzing serial sections. In contrast to PD, where p-α-Syn clustered in autonomic fibers, deposits were mainly found in unmyelinated somatosensory fibers in MSA. CONCLUSION: α-Syn pathology in MSA is not restricted to the CNS, and skin biopsy may be useful for the premortem study of p-α-Syn.

Intervention with impact: Reduced isolation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius from dogs following the introduction of antimicrobial prescribing legislation in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Legislation was introduced in Germany in 2018, requiring bacterial culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing before the prescription of fluoroquinolones and third-generation cephalosporins to dogs. We hypothesised that, following this intervention, the number of clinical samples testing positive for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius (MRSP) would reduce. METHODS: Reports of S. pseudintermedius isolated from canine clinical samples by three German veterinary diagnostic microbiology laboratories during the 38 months before the introduction of the legislation and the 46 months after were compared. Bacterial identification was performed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight mass spectrometry, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing followed recognised recommendations but with changes during the study period. RESULTS: Among a total of 120,571 S. pseudintermedius isolates, MRSP accounted for 7.1% overall. Following the legislative intervention, monthly submissions yielding S. pseudintermedius increased at all three laboratories. The MRSP percentage was lower in the period after the intervention in two of the three laboratories (p < 0.001); in the third laboratory, there was no change between periods, but a year-on-year reduction in MRSP percentages occurred after the intervention (p = 0.0004). LIMITATIONS: Changing susceptibility testing methods limited the direct comparison of resistance patterns among laboratories. CONCLUSION: The reduction in MRSP in canine clinical samples following the introduction of this legislation suggests a positive impact of compulsory laboratory testing on reducing antimicrobial resistance.

An update in incretin-based therapy: a focus on glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists.

The glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, exenatide and liraglutide, offer a unique mechanism in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) as part of the incretin system. Their mechanism of action is to increase insulin secretion, decrease glucagon release, reduce food intake, and slow gastric emptying. They target postprandial blood glucose values and have some effect on fasting levels as well. In addition, they promote weight loss and may help to preserve ß-cell function, both major problems in T2DM patients. Changes in hemoglobin A1c are similar to those produced by other T2DM agents, including thiazolidinediones, low-dose metformin, and sulfonylureas, and better than those caused by α-reductase inhibitors and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. These agents have been safely studied in combination with metformin, sulfonylureas, meglitinides, thiazolidinediones, and insulin therapy. Overall, data are limited for head-to-head comparisons, but it appears that liraglutide may have better efficacy and tolerability compared with exenatide; however, more studies are needed. They are overall well tolerated, with the main adverse events being similar to those with metformin (gastrointestinal intolerances that are transient and dose dependent). However, patients must be monitored for pancreatitis as a rare but possible side effect. For T2DM patients willing to use an injectable agent, exenatide and liraglutide offer another therapeutic option to control hyperglycemia with the potential for weight loss and may be combined with other agents safely.

An update in incretin-based therapy: a focus on dipeptidyl peptidase--4 inhibitors.

Dipeptidyl peptidase -4 inhibitors represent a novel way to augment the incretin system and one of the newest class of medications in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Their mechanism of action is to decrease the inactivation of glucagon-like peptide 1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, both of which are involved in maintaining euglycemia subsequent to carbohydrate intake. Currently investigated agents include sitagliptin, vildagliptin, saxagliptin, linagliptin, and alogliptin. Each agent has been shown to provide significant improvements in glycemic control compared to placebo. They are effective when added to other oral diabetes agents and in the cases of sitagliptin, vildagliptin, and alogliptin in addition to insulin. These agents may not provide as significant improvement in glucose concentrations as some other medications including metformin, thiazolidinediones, or glucagon-like peptide 1 agonists. The lack of head to head clinical data comparing the various dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors does not allow for specific recommendations if one agent is more effective or safer than another within the class. Their side effect profile suggests they are very well tolerated and have few drug interactions. For patients with mildly elevated glucose concentrations, they are therapeutic options in both drug-naive patients as well as those not optimally controlled on other diabetes medications.